I think you and I said the same thing with one exception. Due to difficulty in tracking per user per megahertz I think it would be simpler to just have a per base station fee. The fee could be scaled by the amount (Mhz) of spectrum used in the base station. This would only be for new spectrum and would not be for unlicensed spectrum. This is a carrot that could well justify WISPs getting some usable spectrum with higher power and some spectrum rights. Congress will not likely just give away more spectrum without having some way of creating some revenue stream from it. This does not mean I support taxation. I am trying to find a compromise we can all live with while producing some value for WISPs.

Tom DeReggi wrote:

First, the rcrnews feed is meaningless. It lacked all detail and clarity, to understand what it meant. Second, It is impairative that existing Unlicensed Spectrum NEVER get taxed, and that users and providers of it, NEVER get taxed. Unlicensed spectrum belongs to the people. Whn I charge a client I don;t charge them for spectrum use, I charge them to cover all my other costs (Roof rental, staff, support, etc). I'm charging for services not spectrum. Third, If Taxed, its important that the tax not only be to providers of AP and the service. The reason is that there are not enough providers of APs that it will have any meaningful impact on dollars raised for the governement, UNLESS we are taxed heavy. And we don;t want that. If a tax on unlicensed were to happen, we'd want the tax to get charged to Radio manufacturers based on number of radios made. The reason is that consumer home devices are what are sold in MASS quantity, and a tax per device sold, would allow the governemnt to get the largest volume of tax, and most profit, at the least impact to a single indiviudal. It would allow the lowest tax per user, because the largest dominant group of users would be included. The idea is that we do not want WISPs to be the one that take all the burden. It will likely put us out of business if we had to, and we would be the ones most hurt if we were targeted. Fourth, I am NOT apposed to creating a per user tax for NEWLY allocated spectrum for our industry. The governement is unlikely to allocate spectrum to us because the billions they can auction it for. If the governement gave up the auctioned revenue, in favor of giving it to us (investing/financing us) it would be appropriate to allow the governemtn to put a plan in place for compensation. A per user tax, is a way that ALL provider could have the right to play in the game, and only pay an amount proportional to the number of subscribers they had paying revenue. However, there is a big problem in taxing per user. Its that spectrum usage does not match customer size, in most cases. If one company decided to use all 6 channels for one customer, their tax payment would be much less than than a large number of users sharing a single channel. What they could do is tax providers/users, based on per Mhz in a spectrum range allocated, and per timeslice transmitted. So instead of charging per user, it could be charged per MB of through put. Use more, pay more. However, that would be IMPOSSIBLE to track, prove, and inforce.

Its important to distinguish the fine print in legislation that would allow for taxing unlicensed in general apposed to taxing or charging per user of new spectrum that is allocated.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband

----- Original Message ----- From: "Blair Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Good news and bad news today

Now we know why they want the 477 forms.....

Brian Webster wrote:

Well, it does not surprise me that the government has decided to tax the unlicensed spectrum. Today the Bush administration announced a plan to tax Wi-Fi and other unlicensed spectrum. It is not clear how they will do it yet but the process is in motion. That's the bad news, the good news is they reached agreement on the 5.4 GHz spectrum and that should become available once equipment gets certified. Check the RCR news site for the full stories. Oh well, I suspected that it would not last forever the truly free use of
the spectrum.


Thank You,
Brian Webster
Free World Dialup #481416

Blair Davis

AOL IM Screen Name --  Theory240

West Michigan Wireless ISP

A division of:
Camp Communication Services, INC

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org


Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org


Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to